Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

vaticannews.va

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 264 posts

Re: Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

#191

Post by snaking0776 »

ilaksh wrote: post #18

I'm an atheist, but most of what I have heard from popes in recent years seems like sound and possibly needed advice. Also, even though I feel AI and robotics are very important for progressing humanity, I think that much of the world has long since lost a proper sense of intrinsic human value. It's really gone from overt exploitation to slightly more mild exploitation where we pretend the system is really merit base…

I’m pretty skeptical that we’ll have actual convincing simulations of human brains any time soon. We’re still in the phase of trying to figure out how mice decide to turn left or right in a maze. Not to mention that the ethical/allowed ways of collecting human neural data are incredibly coarse especially the most common forms like fMRI or EEG (maybe some BCI will improve this but it’s still pretty rough technology). Most of our data as well is collected in incredibly controlled conditions (even “naturalistic” stimuli) so the data we operate on is still not particularly indicative of how people act in the real world. Maybe you mean simulations of a “mind” which behaves like people even if it’s not particularly accurate to the brain? What did you mean by this?

Re: Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

#192

Post by epolanski »

graemep wrote: post #188
epolanski wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have long come to the conclusion, backed by data, that presidential and semi-presidential systems are deeply flawed. There's a reason why not a single country turning authoritarian in the last 50 years has been a representative parliamentary democracy. The last one has been Sri Lanka in the 70s. Not a single one since then. Electing single individuals to power instead of parties and coalitions is a terrible idea. T…

> The last one has been Sri Lanka in the 70s Sri Lanka did not become authoritarian in the 70s. It did adopt a presidential system.

It did, under Bandaranaike.

In 1971 the government declared an unlawful state of emergency that stayed in force for 6 years suspending civil liberties, suppressing press freedom and giving the executive wide powers. The constitution was updated, by the parliament, the same constitution prolonged the current government mandate for two years without elections.

What you're talking about are the events of 1978.

And, as you probably know, during the 80s, that presidential and authoritarian shift only got worse.

But my point stands, 1970s Sri Lanka, is still to date, the last parliamentary republic to turn authoritarian. Didn't cite this randomly.

Re: Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

#193

Post by CoastalCoder »

AlanYx wrote: post #186
CoastalCoder wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've recently started listening to a podcast from a retired Anglican Bishop, "Ask N.T. Wright Anything". IIUC, he claims that the concept of "soul" is something that the wasn't really present in the Jewish worldview of Jesus' time. Rather, it's something that later theologians (Aquinas?) picked up from Greek philosophy (Platonism?). I wonder if that means Wright would have a different take on the whole "only humans h…

>he claims that the concept of "soul" is something that the wasn't really present in the Jewish worldview of Jesus' time That's a broadly accepted take among religious historians, although it's off by a half century, roughly, if you include the Jewish diaspora. Philo of Alexandria did begin to integrate Jewish scripture with Greek philosophy on the soul during his lifetime.

Interesting. Thanks!

> although it's off by a half century, roughly, if you include the Jewish diaspora.

Mind expanding on this part?

Re: Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

#194

Post by toasty228 »

ilaksh wrote: post #18

I'm an atheist, but most of what I have heard from popes in recent years seems like sound and possibly needed advice. Also, even though I feel AI and robotics are very important for progressing humanity, I think that much of the world has long since lost a proper sense of intrinsic human value. It's really gone from overt exploitation to slightly more mild exploitation where we pretend the system is really merit base…

We could do that without waiting for """AI""", actually I see absolutely no reason why """AI""" would move this topic in a good direction.

Factories were supposed to deliver us from work, automation was supposed to deliver us from work, computers were supposed to deliver us from work, now it's """AI""", tomorrow it'll be "quantum computers", the next time it'll be "cold fusion". It does not work and will never work, because it's not a bug in the system, it is the system

Re: Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

#195

Post by triceratops »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #168
vasco wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah and if there was a global organization of Harry Potter PhDs that selected the best from all over the world for hundreds of years I'd probably think those guys were smart too and probably wouldn't have surface level takes about adjacent topics.

Given what we know about the origins of Harry Potter, you basically proved ryandrake’s point. Just because you put time into something does not make it worthy of attention. Religions’ primary purpose is to facilitate tribal bonds, not experimentally seek truths and evaluate data for consistency. That is why almost all start with a set of tenets or immutable “facts”, such as the existence of an immortal component of a…

No vasco is saying if Harry Potter fans put a lot of study into astronomy, would you immediately discount their expertise in astronomy because of their devotion to Potterdom?

Re: Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

#196

Post by maleldil »

buntsai wrote: post #176
bananaflag wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope the speech isn't something dumb like "remember only humans have souls" This is the position of the Catholic Church, so don't expect anything different. My hope is that, within those boundaries, he may find something interesting and meaningful to say.

Is that really the position of the Catholic Church or what is a caricature of what people think it believes? The nice thing about the Catholic Church is that required beliefs have a formal spec. For something has important as this, there would be a clear and unambiguous references. Catholic Catechism / church council / papal encyclical. Do you have a quotable reference? What I can find is only Aquinas that all living…

Only humans have immortal souls. From the Catechism (1703):

> Endowed with "a spiritual and immortal" soul, The human person is "the only creature on earth that God has willed for its own sake."

https://www.vatican.va/content/catechism/en/part_three/secti...

Re: Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

#197

Post by lo_zamoyski »

KoolKat23 wrote: post #138
ilaksh wrote: post #18

I'm an atheist, but most of what I have heard from popes in recent years seems like sound and possibly needed advice. Also, even though I feel AI and robotics are very important for progressing humanity, I think that much of the world has long since lost a proper sense of intrinsic human value. It's really gone from overt exploitation to slightly more mild exploitation where we pretend the system is really merit base…

This is a great point, further to your point on AI. Another perhaps worse offender is our focus on "the economy", at times the focus is always on "what about the economy?!" Forgetting "the economy" is merely a tool intended to improve the human condition. Sometimes I feel people lose sight of this original intention, be it unintentional or otherwise.

> Sometimes I feel people lose sight of this original intention, be it unintentional or otherwise.

It's more than a matter of losing sight. This is endemic to liberal hyperindividualism which places the individual and "consumer utility" at the center of economic activity. This ideological presupposition actively works against human flourishing - and even the viability of an economy at all - as a precondition for successful economies is so-called "normal social reproduction". Our consumerist economic order is actively hostile to stable family formation and fecundity (as evidenced by precipitous demographic decline) and thus to the health of society in general.

The economy is indeed supposed to be in the service of human flourishing. Modern economics instead optimizes for "utility maximization".

Re: Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

#198

Post by rss_gpt »

graemep wrote: post #162
orochimaaru wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What rot. Tell that to native Americans who were forcibly converted and enslaved. Tell that to people in the inquisition. Tell that to peoples in India and the east that were forcibly converted so that the pope could fill his coffers. Tell that to all the children murdered in Christian and catholic schools. Christianity and Catholicism doesn’t fool me. If you’ve ever wanted to see the mythical devil - look to those p…

> Tell that to native Americans who were forcibly converted and enslaved. Tell that to those were were protects by the influence of the Church. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protector_of_the_Indians > Tell that to people in the inquisition. Which inquisition? Do you by any chance mean the Spanish Inquisition? An agency of the Spanish government. > Tell that to peoples in India and the east that were forcibly converte…

[dead]

Re: Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

#199

Post by mamala_mamachan »

graemep wrote: post #162
orochimaaru wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What rot. Tell that to native Americans who were forcibly converted and enslaved. Tell that to people in the inquisition. Tell that to peoples in India and the east that were forcibly converted so that the pope could fill his coffers. Tell that to all the children murdered in Christian and catholic schools. Christianity and Catholicism doesn’t fool me. If you’ve ever wanted to see the mythical devil - look to those p…

> Tell that to native Americans who were forcibly converted and enslaved. Tell that to those were were protects by the influence of the Church. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protector_of_the_Indians > Tell that to people in the inquisition. Which inquisition? Do you by any chance mean the Spanish Inquisition? An agency of the Spanish government. > Tell that to peoples in India and the east that were forcibly converte…

> > Tell that to peoples in India and the east that were forcibly converted so that the pope could fill his coffers

> Which people. There were Christians in India for 2,000 years. Some of my ancestors probably converted before the English did.

These Christians in India, who have been there for 2,000 years, are only the syrian christians or st thomas christians or malankara nasranis that follow eastern rite liturgies(syriac rites to be specific), and they all happen to be from the state of kerala or the malabar region only. The state itself has latin rite catholics as well as protestants which all started only since European colonial arrivals, though the syrian christians or st thomas christians or malankara nasranis are the majority of christians from that state. I am not trying to argue that all these people in India from european christianity(latin rite catholic and protestant) are forced converts or anything. Still, anytime this argument comes up, the syrian christians or st thomas christians or malankara nasranis are used as a shield, still, at the same time, in other cases, the community is also ridiculed as wrong christianity and the history of community as fake by the same people who use it as shield (the event of terming as wrong literally happened when portuguese came in the 15th century and force converted all to latin rite through synod of diamper which led to coonan cross oath leading to restoration of syriac litrugy but unfortunately permanently splitting the community into eastern catholics and orthodox denominations; even the british later came and tried to protestantise creating a small protestant faction also out the orthodox ones).

Re: Pope Leo XIV’s first encyclical Magnifica humanitas to be published May 25

#200

Post by lo_zamoyski »

buntsai wrote: post #176
bananaflag wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hope the speech isn't something dumb like "remember only humans have souls" This is the position of the Catholic Church, so don't expect anything different. My hope is that, within those boundaries, he may find something interesting and meaningful to say.

Is that really the position of the Catholic Church or what is a caricature of what people think it believes? The nice thing about the Catholic Church is that required beliefs have a formal spec. For something has important as this, there would be a clear and unambiguous references. Catholic Catechism / church council / papal encyclical. Do you have a quotable reference? What I can find is only Aquinas that all living…

Indeed, the Cartesian position is not the Catholic position and, in fact, directly contradicts the Catholic position.

The soul, according to an Aristotelian-Thomistic understanding, is the form of a living thing. Form is what makes a thing what it is. If you deny form, then you deny that things have any identity whatsoever and the world becomes unintelligible. Science itself becomes impossible.

So, the form is the formal cause of a thing's identity, and so everything that exists has a formal cause, because you cannot not have something that isn't something. In living things, we call this form the soul; we sometimes say that the soul is the form of the body. Accordingly, it is absurd to think of the soul and the body to be two things (like Descartes thought), just as it is absurd to treat the spherical shape of a ball of bronze as a distinct thing from the bronze. There is no sphericial-shape-as-such or bronze-as-such as things in the world.

While Descartes denied the consciousness of non-human animals, this was never the Aristotelian-Thomist position. In fact, it is taken to be flatly wrong. So denial of the consciousness of non-human animals is not really traditional at all. It is very much modern.

Post reply on HN